У сваком Еванђељу има нешто о појави Исуса Његовим ученицима након недељног јутра када су гроб нашли празним. На пример, види Јеванђеље по Матеју 28:16-20; Јеванђеље по Марку 16:14-19; Јеванђеље по Луки 24:13-33; Јеванђеље по Јовану 20:19-31, и Јеванђеље по Јовану 21.

У Луки, постоји прича о двојици ученика који су од Јерузалема до села Еммаус ходали око седам километара. Убрзо након што напусте град, прилази им други путник који је приметио њихова проблематична лица и озбиљне разговоре и пита их шта их мучи. Ходајући заједно, питају странца: "Зар нисте чули за невоље у Јерусалиму, како је пророк из Галилеје, за кога смо се надали да ће спасити Израел, бити распет?" И чудно је рећи, када су неке жене отишле трећег дана да помажу Његово тело, угледале су анђеле који су им рекли да он није тамо, али да је васкрснуо из мртвих. "

Чувши то, путник их изјављује да не верују и каже: "Зар не видите да је Христ морао да трпи те ствари и да уђе у своју славу?" Незнанац тада каже двојици ученика многе ствари које се тичу Исуса, из Мојсијевих књига и пророка, у Старом завету. Двоје ученика слуша са страхом, али не препознају странца. Дуго стижу у Еммаус. Чини се да је странац желио наставити када њих двоје стану, али га моле и да престане, јер касно долази дан, а они желе да чују више. Тако сви сједе да подијеле вечеру, а кад странац узме хљеб круха и сломи га и подијели му комаде, отворе се очи и препознају га и он нестаје.

Може се замислити запањено страхопоштовање које их је обузело обојица док су схватили да је то Исус. Знали су да је распет, а ходао је и разговарао с њима неколико сати. Жене су биле у праву! Анђели су били у праву! Био је жив!

Нова Црква верује да постоје унутрашње значење свих прича у Речи Господњој, светим писмима и да је то унутрашње значење, у дословним причама о Абрахаму, Изаку и Јакову, Јошуи, Самуелу, Давиду и почивај, и све изреке пророка од Изаије до Малахија, и четири еванђеља ... ово значење чини Реч светим.

Па шта овде можемо видети у овој причи? Па, тај унутрашњи смисао у "Мојсију и пророцима" је прича о Исусовом животу у свету, од његовог рођења у Бетлехему, кроз све његове године раста, до његове "смрти", а потом и његовог успона. Пошто је Исус то знао и сигурно је читао Свето писмо и разумео их изнутра, дуго је знао како ће се затворити његов земаљски живот и да је потребно да се затвори као што је „написано“, како би се спаси људски род. Тако је рекао двојици ученика ту причу док су ходали према Еммаусу.

Више о тој шетњи ... У Речи, свако спомињање ходања заиста се односи на то како живимо свој живот из дана у дан. У многим причама Речи каже се да је неко ходао с Богом. Каже се да требамо ићи Његовим путевима и да морамо ићи правом и уском стазом.

Такође у овој причи нам је речено да је ово било путовање од шездесет стадија (на изворном грчком). Шездесет (или осталих вишеструких "шест") представља доживотно дело одбацивања искушења која потичу из наше урођене себичности. Објаснио апокалипсу 648. Дакле, ово путовање до Емауса значи путовање нашег живота - као особе која покушава да следи Господинова учења и постане анђео.

Одредиште је био Еммаус. У Речи било који град представља науку, организовани скуп истина које смо поставили да бисмо могли да живимо у складу са њима - нашим животним правилима. Види Duhovnom Dnevniku 402. Они нису нужно добри, као што су Јерусалим или Бетлехем, али могу бити и зле доктрине, нпр. Содом или Бабилон. Мој речник ми каже да име Еммаус значи „врели извори“. Друго универзално значење Речи је да вода значи истину у њеним корисним употребама, али такође може значити истину коју су они који су у паклу искривљени у лаж, у супротном смислу. Погледајте, на пример, Duhovnom Dnevniku 790. Помислите на бунаре које је Абрахам ископао, или на воде које је Исус обећао жени Самарији док су разговарали са Јаковљевим бунаром, или на чисту реку воде која извире испод трона у Новом Јерусалиму у књизи Откривења. У свом обрнутом смислу, где је вода деструктивна, помислите на поплаву која је уништила све осим Ноа и његову породицу, или на Црвено море које је требало раздвојити да би деца Израела могла да пређу. Извори које је Емаус заступао биле су свете истине које су одјекнуле од Речи за употребу. А то су врели извори, а топлота значи љубав. То је наше одредиште, где истина и љубав заједно извиру за нас у кориштењу, у непрекидном Господину.

Ова обична мала анегдота о томе како ученици сусрећу Господа на путу за Емаус нису само приче о Исусовом васкрсењу са духовним телом. То је такође прича о томе како би требало да живимо свој живот. Можемо путовати према небу, слушати Господа, ходати путем с њим, а на крају ће он сломити хлеб и вечерати с нама.

5008. 'And he left his garment in her hand' means that this outermost truth was removed. This is clear from the meaning of 'leaving in her hand' as leaving to its power and control, for 'the hand' means power or power and control, 878, 3091, 3387, 3563, 4931-4937, a removal being meant here since it is said that 'she took hold of his garment'; and from the meaning of 'a garment' as outermost truth, dealt with above in 5006. No one can begin to understand what is meant by a wish on the part of unspiritual natural truth to join itself to spiritual natural truth, or by the latter being filled with aversion to such a joining together and therefore leaving the outermost truth behind, that is, allowing this to be removed, except with the help of examples to shed light on the matter. But first, see what unspiritual natural truth is, and what spiritual natural truth is, in 4988, 4992; also the fact that the two are associated with each other so far as outermost things are concerned but that they are in no way joined to each other [4989].

[2] But, as has been said, examples will help to shed light on this matter. Take this one first. Within the Church there exists the unspiritual natural truth which says that good should be done to the poor, widows and orphans, and that doing good to these is the charity which is commanded in the Word. But unspiritual truth, or rather, people guided by unspiritual truth, understand the poor, widows and orphans to be those who are literally called such, whereas spiritual natural truth, or rather, people guided by this kind of truth - while giving their firm assent to this unspiritual natural truth - place such an understanding of the expression 'poor, widows and orphans' in the last or outermost position. For in their hearts they say that not all people calling themselves the poor are in fact such, and also that some of those who are poor lead very wicked lives, fearing neither God nor men, and ready to plunge into every unmentionable deed but for the fear that holds them back. They also say in their hearts that in the Word the expression 'the poor' is used to mean those who are such spiritually, that is to say, those who know and in their hearts confess that nothing good or true at all that originates in themselves resides with them and that everything that is there has been freely given them. The expressions 'widows' and 'orphans' are considered by them in a similar way, the difference being that each involves some different state. From this example it may be seen that to people guided by spiritual natural truth doing good to the poor, widows and orphans who are literally called such is an outermost truth, and that this outermost truth is like a garment covering the things within. One may also see that this outermost truth fits in with the truth as understood by those guided by unspiritual natural truth; and that even so the two are not joined together but have merely an association with each other.

[3] Take the example of doing good to the neighbour. Those guided by spiritual natural truth consider every individual person to be their neighbour, yet each one to be such in a different manner and degree. In their hearts they say that those governed by good are pre-eminently the neighbour to whom good should be done. They also say that those governed by evil are likewise the neighbour, but that good is done to these if they suffer the punishments prescribed by laws, because those punishments serve to correct them, as well as to prevent evil being done to the good by them and the bad examples they set. Those within the Church who are guided by unspiritual natural truth likewise call every individual person the neighbour; but they do not take into consideration the degree or manner in which each one is a neighbour. Therefore if motivated by natural goodness they do good indiscriminately, to everyone who moves them to pity, most of all to the evil rather than the good because the evil in their malice know how to arouse feelings of pity. From this example too one may see that this outermost truth brings together those guided by unspiritual natural truth and those guided by spiritual natural truth, and yet the two are still not joined together but have merely an association with each other, since one has a different idea and different perception from the other of the neighbour and of charity towards him.

[4] Take a further example. Those guided by spiritual natural truth say in general that the poor and the wretched are to inherit the kingdom of heaven. But for them this is an outermost truth since they gather up within this the belief that 'the poor' and 'the wretched' are those who are spiritually such, and that these are the ones meant in the Word, to whom the heavenly kingdom will belong. But those within the Church who are guided by unspiritual natural truth say that no others can inherit the kingdom of heaven but those who in the world have been reduced to poverty, live in wretched circumstances, and suffer greater affliction than everyone else. They also call riches, important positions, and worldly joys just so many distractions or means that divert a person from heaven. This example also shows what an outermost truth is and the nature of the harmony between the two kinds of natural truth; it shows that they are not joined together, but have merely an association with each other.

[5] Take this example too. Those guided by spiritual natural truth consider it an outermost truth that those objects which in the Word are called holy really were holy, such as the ark and mercy seat, the lampstand, the incense, the leaves, and so on, as well as the altar; also the temple; and Aaron's vestments too, which are called vestments of holiness - in particular the ephod together with the breastplate where the urim and thummim were. Yet the idea they have so far as this outermost truth is concerned is that those objects were not in themselves holy, nor had they had any holiness instilled into them, but that they were holy in a representative sense, that is to say, they represented the spiritual and celestial realities of the Lord's kingdom, and in the highest sense the Lord Himself. People guided by unspiritual natural truth however also call those objects holy, but holy in themselves because holiness has been instilled into them. From this one may see that the two kinds of truth meet but do not become joined to each other; for as the spiritual man's conception of that outermost truth is different from that of the merely natural man, a different form is taken by each.

[6] Take yet another example. To the spiritual man it is an outermost truth that all Divine truths can be substantiated from the literal sense of the Word, and also by means of the rational or intellectual concepts known to the enlightened. That same outermost or general truth is also accepted by the natural man, but he has the simple belief that everything is true which can be substantiated from the Word, above all that which he himself has substantiated from it. The spiritual man and the natural man meet each other therefore in their common acceptance of the idea that every Divine truth can be substantiated; yet one sees this general truth in a different way from the other. The merely natural man believes that whatever he himself has substantiated for himself, or else has heard others substantiate, is a Divine truth. He does not realize that falsity can be substantiated just as easily as truth, and that, once substantiated, falsity has all the appearance of truth; indeed it appears to be more true than the truth itself, because the illusions of the senses enter in and present it in the light of the world separated from the light of heaven.

[7] This too shows what outermost spiritual truth seems like to the natural man - like a garment. It also shows that when this garment is removed nothing at all is left to draw the two together, as a consequence of which the spiritual man no longer has anything with which to protect himself from the natural man, which considerations are meant by Joseph's leaving his garment behind, fleeing, and going out of doors. For the merely natural man does not acknowledge interior truths, and therefore when exterior ones are taken away or removed a severance instantly takes place. What is more, all the ideas introduced by the spiritual man to substantiate outermost truth are called falsities by the natural man since he has no ability to see whether the idea substantiated by the spiritual man is really true. It is not possible to see by natural light what belongs to spiritual light, for to do so is contrary to order. But seeing by spiritual light what belongs to natural light is in keeping with order.